17:02:53 <dtantsur> #startmeeting ironic
17:02:54 <openstack> Meeting started Mon May 29 17:02:53 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is dtantsur. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:02:55 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:02:57 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ironic'
17:03:01 <dtantsur> hi all, sorry for the delay!
17:03:02 <ricardoas> o/
17:03:08 <vdrok> hello! :)
17:03:24 <dtantsur> our agenda can be found, as usual, here:
17:03:27 <dtantsur> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic
17:03:32 <rloo> o/
17:03:41 <dtantsur> #topic Announcements / Reminder
17:03:48 <izumi777> o/
17:03:56 <dtantsur> I have requested releases for stable branches of all projects
17:04:14 <dtantsur> they're still on review, will hopefully happen this week
17:04:16 <xavierr> o/
17:04:28 <dtantsur> anything from anyone else?
17:04:42 <rloo> dtantsur: do we want to try to get the backport for oneview?
17:04:54 <rloo> dtantsur: for the upcoming releases
17:05:19 <dtantsur> rloo: I'd prefer not to change anything already. if we want to, we can make another release even in a week
17:05:25 <rloo> dtantsur: ok
17:05:28 <dtantsur> but if it does merge really soon - I can reconsider this
17:05:43 <dtantsur> anything else?
17:05:53 <ricardoas> dtantsur: what are these releases?
17:06:17 <dtantsur> ricardoas: I don't think I understand the question. we make patch releases from stable branches from time to time
17:06:35 <ricardoas> dtantsur: that's it... :)
17:06:36 <dtantsur> voices in my head told me that this is about the time to make another bunch of such releases
17:06:52 <ricardoas> thanks!
17:06:52 <dtantsur> they're not time-based, just my gut feeling (and some amount of spare time)
17:07:49 <dtantsur> #topic Review subteam status reports (capped at ten minutes)
17:08:03 <dtantsur> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicWhiteBoard starting with line 94
17:08:33 <rloo> dtantsur: did you update the bug stats for today?
17:08:48 <dtantsur> rloo: nope, sorry. will update for 2 weeks next time
17:08:59 <rloo> dtantsur: ok, thx
17:09:04 * dtantsur is not feeling well recently, and confused the time of this meeting
17:09:30 <dtantsur> hmm, I haven't seen any updates about rescue for some time
17:10:19 <dtantsur> rloo: the deploy steps spec, does it need another update or are the comments there contentious?
17:10:42 <rloo> dtantsur: needs an update. i actually haven't looked at it recently; will look this week.
17:11:09 <dtantsur> ack
17:12:11 <dtantsur> so, rescue is concerning me
17:12:24 <dtantsur> anyone else has a feeling that it's not making Pike?
17:13:06 <rloo> dtantsur: it is still possible, we should find out whether anyone is actually going to work on it soon
17:13:34 <izumi777> I think so, too
17:13:39 <Nisha_Agarwal> rloo, dtantsur as i know stendulker and aparnav are working onit
17:13:43 <vmud213> dtantsur: I guess Aparna is working on that
17:13:48 <dtantsur> the patches seem to have some activity
17:13:53 <Nisha_Agarwal> but both of them are on leave
17:14:06 <rloo> Nisha_Agarwal: could you light a fire under them -- are they updating the status so we know what's going on or not going on?
17:14:19 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal, vmud213, when they come back, please ask them to update the whiteboard. if they can't make it to the meeting, please ask them to do it in advance
17:14:33 <Nisha_Agarwal> rloo, sure. i just came back last week from vacation so dont know actual status
17:14:35 <vmud213> dtantsur:sure
17:14:44 <dtantsur> thanks!
17:14:50 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, sure
17:14:52 <Nisha_Agarwal> :)
17:15:36 <rloo> dtantsur: wrt redfish, that power thing is a bug, right? what's outstanding wrt the feature?
17:16:01 <dtantsur> rloo: nothing. I just can't call it done, until we have power actions working the same way as in other drivers.
17:16:15 <rloo> etags spec was approved; i'll update that status
17:16:26 <rloo> dtantsur: ah, ok. so we have CI and docs done, just that 'bug'.
17:16:39 <dtantsur> mm, I think I did a minute ago
17:16:43 <dtantsur> yep
17:17:44 <rloo> and YAY, etags spec merged !
17:17:49 <dtantsur> \o/
17:18:12 <rloo> does anyone know if the etag patches are ready to review?
17:18:23 * dtantsur does not
17:18:46 <vdrok> I'll take a look and update the whiteboard
17:18:57 <dtantsur> rloo: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bug/1605728
17:19:02 <dtantsur> and needs removing your -2
17:19:50 <dtantsur> I'm done reviewing the status
17:19:58 <rloo> dtantsur: done, thx for reminder. but i guess nothing is ready to be reviewed yet.
17:20:08 <rloo> +1 done with status
17:20:10 <dtantsur> does not look like that
17:20:14 <dtantsur> everyone done?
17:20:19 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, for py3.5 i wanted to discuss
17:20:40 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal: feel free to bring it on the open discussion
17:20:48 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, sure
17:20:57 <dtantsur> #topic Deciding on priorities for the coming week
17:21:08 <dtantsur> so, we've finished one item
17:21:42 <rloo> dtantsur: we have to remove rolling upgrades, nothing to review yet.
17:22:07 <dtantsur> this is sad, but yeah. I hope we can re-introduce it next week
17:22:15 <rloo> dtantsur: me hopes too!
17:22:46 <dtantsur> the next item we could take is https://review.openstack.org/#/c/439907/
17:22:59 <dtantsur> "OSC commands for ironic driver-related commands"
17:23:14 <dtantsur> which is quite important for feature parity between CLI tools we have
17:23:24 <rloo> dtantsur: that's on my plate; i have to write/update
17:23:31 <rloo> dtantsur: hoping to do that this week too
17:23:51 <dtantsur> rloo: do you think we could try finishing the spec this week?
17:24:12 <rloo> dtantsur: would like to.
17:24:28 <dtantsur> rloo: ok. I can help you with it, if you'll be running out of time.
17:24:45 <rloo> dtantsur: thx. i need to sit down and think about sambett's comments
17:25:11 <rloo> are there any network-related things that we should be looking at? (not that i have time...)
17:25:25 <dtantsur> vdrok: ^^^?
17:25:33 * dtantsur does not see vsaienk0 around
17:25:54 <rloo> is vsaienk0 back this week or next?
17:26:10 <dtantsur> I think I saw him this morning
17:26:14 <vdrok> rloo: yeah he's back
17:26:21 <vdrok> just the things that are here https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/networking-baremetal
17:26:29 <vdrok> but they were reviewed already
17:26:32 <rloo> good :-)
17:26:34 <dtantsur> good, yeah
17:26:42 <dtantsur> I don't think I understand this code well, tbh
17:26:46 <rloo> we should get an update from vsaienk0; he's probably catching up on stuff.
17:27:03 <dtantsur> ok, we have 3 items: from BFV, from driver composition and OSC work
17:27:20 <dtantsur> does this list look good? do you want to add and/or remove something?
17:27:26 <rloo> btw dtantsur, wrt redfish. 'we need to fix it' -- do you know who will fix it or do you need someone to volunteer to fix it?
17:27:48 <dtantsur> rloo: I will. but we decided with sambetts to do some refactoring first
17:27:59 <rloo> dtantsur: ok, i'll update to indicate you :-)
17:28:04 <dtantsur> we want to stop copy-pasting the "wait for power state" loop to all drivers
17:28:13 <dtantsur> so he has a WIP patch to move it to the conductor
17:28:31 <rloo> dtantsur: ah, yes, i recall those discussions.ok, so it'll be fixed soonish.
17:28:58 <dtantsur> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/449454/
17:29:45 <dtantsur> ok, any changes to the list?
17:29:51 <rloo> i'm good with the priorities
17:30:19 <dtantsur> #topic Open discussion
17:30:33 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal: you wanted to discuss something?
17:30:49 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, yes
17:31:27 <rloo> go ahead Nisha_Agarwal...
17:31:33 <Nisha_Agarwal> i raised couple of patches to add experimental gates for ironic governed projects
17:32:27 <Nisha_Agarwal> but got the comment that this lot of duplicating in the project-config project, so instead we should add python3 in existing gates
17:33:04 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal: link handy?
17:33:37 <Nisha_Agarwal> but i am afraid that if i address that comment then gates will start failing as swift is not ready fr py3.5
17:33:41 <Nisha_Agarwal> yes
17:33:49 <Nisha_Agarwal> i updated in whiteboard
17:34:43 <Nisha_Agarwal> #link https://review.openstack.org/462706
17:34:59 <Nisha_Agarwal> #link https://review.openstack.org/462701
17:35:26 <Nisha_Agarwal> #link https://review.openstack.org/462487, https://review.openstack.org/462695
17:35:28 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal: I don't read Ian's comments the same way. I think what he asks for is to use the same builder, not the same jobs
17:35:47 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, we use the same builder
17:36:00 <dtantsur> right. this does not mean that existing voting jobs will start using python 3
17:36:05 <Nisha_Agarwal> no
17:36:20 <dtantsur> it just means adding (yet another) option to our main builder
17:36:25 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, i added one experimental gate per project
17:37:03 <Nisha_Agarwal> whch is kind of duplication of already running gates, just added python3 builder
17:37:28 <dtantsur> yeah, so the ironic change seems good
17:37:44 <Nisha_Agarwal> ironic was already in when i took over
17:37:46 <dtantsur> I guess the ironicclient one is contentious, right?
17:38:04 <dtantsur> let's start with limiting the scope of the problem
17:38:27 <dtantsur> let's get only a job on ironic first. it will already cover ironic-lib, python-ironicclient and python-ironic-inspector-client implicitly
17:38:49 <dtantsur> let's make it passing, overcome the swift-related issue, then consider moving on
17:38:53 <Nisha_Agarwal> yes ironicclient, ironic-inspector, ironic-lib anf ironi-inspector-client
17:39:08 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, ok
17:39:30 <Nisha_Agarwal> so will wait for ironic related patch to get merged
17:39:34 <dtantsur> the second one will be ironic-inspector, as it's another service
17:39:52 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, yes but it also has the similar comment
17:40:03 <dtantsur> that will get us complete coverage already. as soon as the jobs are voting, we can declare the goal fulfilled
17:40:03 <Nisha_Agarwal> ipa patch is merged
17:40:49 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal: I did not have a chance to look at the IPA change, and I wonder if it *actually* tests IPA with python 3. but this is the 3rd priority, after ironic and ironic-inspector
17:41:55 <vmud213> dtantsur: Just wanted to check
17:42:02 <vmud213> if it is possible to take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/422572/ this week.
17:42:45 <dtantsur> it's not impossible, but I cannot make any promises
17:43:43 <vmud213> As per the earlier discussion in Virtual meetup, this is one of the pending patch not getting much attention for a while ..
17:44:27 <vdrok> i'll try to take a look
17:44:33 <dtantsur> I'd not say that not having reviews in 4 days is "for a while", though I'd love to improve on it
17:45:01 <izumi777> I'd like to ask a question to someone. I'm in trouble with Ironic tempest test. I can't do scenario test. Is my environment something wrong or bug?
17:45:23 <vmud213> vdrok: THanks
17:45:35 <ricardoas> dtantsur: we fixed the version of python-oneviewclient for newton here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/468925/ should I ping you and rloo when the CI evaluate it?
17:45:48 <dtantsur> izumi777: hard to tell without going into details, but chances are high that it's related to your environment, as we run the tests in our CI
17:46:21 <dtantsur> ricardoas: quick review: please expand your release note with the detailed explanation of the situation
17:46:48 <ricardoas> dtantsur: sure!
17:46:56 <dtantsur> ricardoas: the release team would like to know why we bump this version. it's critical to mention in both the commit message and the release note that the service has never worked with the version in question
17:47:08 * Nisha_Agarwal got disconnected in between....
17:47:13 <dtantsur> ricardoas: I'd also appreciate a +2 from someone from the global stable team, not only rloo and me
17:47:18 <izumi777> datnsur: hmm, I see.
17:47:28 <dtantsur> ricardoas: please find them on #openstack-stable
17:47:54 <ricardoas> dtantsur: ok, thanks!
17:48:11 <dtantsur> Nisha_Agarwal: back to your initial question: I think what they ask is to reuse the builder for python 2 and 3 by parametrizing it
17:48:27 <dtantsur> this does not mean changing the existing job, only making the builder more flexible
17:48:32 <dtantsur> ricardoas: you're welcome
17:48:53 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, ok. let me see
17:49:16 <Nisha_Agarwal> dtantsur, thanks. will check how we can do this in infra
17:49:21 <dtantsur> yes please
17:49:38 <Nisha_Agarwal> :)
17:49:43 <izumi777> Does anyone encounter the phenoma: tempest.lib.exceptions.TimeoutException: Request timed out Details: (BaremetalBasicOps:test_baremetal_server_ops) Server 3497db75-4a12-447c-b45f-8814ff9bc35c failed to reach ACTIVE status and task state "None" within the required time (196 s). Current status: BUILD. Current task state: spawning. ?
17:50:02 <izumi777> any hint?
17:50:18 <dtantsur> izumi777: this is a very generic issue. it only means the server timed out to deploy. it may be problems with your PXE environment or DHCP
17:50:48 <dtantsur> izumi777: your next step, I guess it to figure out what *actually* happened to the node. maybe by looking at its console.
17:51:44 <izumi777> I could deploy maucally successfully, but failed in tempest case.
17:52:08 <Nisha_Agarwal> izumi777, may be some of the tempest variables are not getting populated
17:52:15 <dtantsur> this may mean something is wrong with networking configuration. I guess double-checking tempest.conf is a good idea
17:53:23 <izumi777> dtantsur, Nisha_Agarwal: Thanks for giving me a hint! I'll check tempest.conf.
17:53:28 <dtantsur> any other questions for the meeting? I guess the debugging session can be moved to the channel.
17:53:46 * dtantsur does not mind wrapping up early
17:54:37 <rloo> crickets
17:54:39 <dtantsur> aaaaaaannnnndd
17:54:45 <dtantsur> thank you everyone!
17:54:50 <Nisha_Agarwal> :)
17:54:55 <dtantsur> #endmeeting ironic